Popular Post Stevo985 Posted January 5 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted January 5 (edited) 12 hours ago, Follyfoot said: What behind Martinez and Torres? 12 hours ago, Follyfoot said: And Luiz If people have managed to convince themselves that Grealish wasn't the best player we've had in the last 30 odd years then all power to you. He'd walk into our team. And he'd be the star Edited January 5 by Stevo985 5 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 On 01/01/2024 at 16:32, PaulC said: The thing is I must have been broken into 15 times in my life houses/ shop and but apart from close family and friends nobody cared. We only know about this because he's famous. How does this have 3 likes. What is the point exactly? 100s if not 1000s of people get robbed every day, not everyday does a family have to run to a panic room in their house whilst armes burglars break in and steal over a million pounds. That's how news works. It'd be boring if it was 100 articles a day on how Trevor's bike got pinched or someone stole Mary's 42 inch TV 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 I still don't get how we would not have breached FFP rules without selling Grealish. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted January 5 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5 27 minutes ago, rodders0223 said: How does this have 3 likes. What is the point exactly? 100s if not 1000s of people get robbed every day, not everyday does a family have to run to a panic room in their house whilst armes burglars break in and steal over a million pounds. That's how news works. It'd be boring if it was 100 articles a day on how Trevor's bike got pinched or someone stole Mary's 42 inch TV I'm not sure why someone is surprised that something happening to an incredibly famous footballer is more newsworthy than it happening to Joe Bloggs that nobody has ever heard of 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 5 hours ago, ThunderPower_14 said: He'd be absolutely perfect in the Ramsay role and he'd be our best player. Every player around him would benefit. The old Grealish would. Not this negative version terrified to beat players and disappoint Pep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WakefieldVillan Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 1 hour ago, Zatman said: The old Grealish would. Not this negative version terrified to beat players and disappoint Pep This is for me the correct answer. The Grealish that played for us would undoubtedly be brilliant in our team now and would be the stand-out player. Not this current Grealish that recycles the ball well and lays it sideways a lot. I know he does more than this but he's a shadow of the player that he was with us and he's not been any different with England either. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rds1983 Posted January 5 VT Supporter Share Posted January 5 8 hours ago, Zatman said: The old Grealish would. Not this negative version terrified to beat players and disappoint Pep It's hard to judge him based off his club football and how Pep plays him. Who knows how an attack minded tactical genius would utilise him. We'd have to look at where else he is playing and how his international manager uses him to figure that out. Actually, hang on, that doesn't work. Forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted January 5 Share Posted January 5 On 01/01/2024 at 16:32, PaulC said: The thing is I must have been broken into 15 times in my life houses/ shop and but apart from close family and friends nobody cared. We only know about this because he's famous. 15?! Where do you live? Compton? 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stewiek2 Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 Pep has paid £100m for one of the most exciting talents in football at the time, only to turn him into a Eunuch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 28 minutes ago, stewiek2 said: Pep has paid £100m for one of the most exciting talents in football at the time, only to turn him into a Eunuch. Pep could've spent much less on a player with the same productivity from that position in his system. But Pepe never signed Grealish to play for City. He signed him so he wasn't playing for someone else. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 1 minute ago, kurtsimonw said: Pep could've spent much less on a player with the same productivity from that position in his system. But Pepe never signed Grealish to play for City. He signed him so he wasn't playing for someone else. A He actually may have signed him to raise the profile of the club, he was the pin up boy when he left us, oh and also for the English quota ofcourse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 2 minutes ago, foreveryoung said: A He actually may have signed him to raise the profile of the club, he was the pin up boy when he left us, oh and also for the English quota ofcourse. Yeah I suppose the extra they paid is probably worth it in a commercial sense. I do think it's mad that people wouldn't have him back. He would not only be the best player in the team, but it would be by a fairly big distance. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foreveryoung Posted January 7 Share Posted January 7 7 minutes ago, kurtsimonw said: Yeah I suppose the extra they paid is probably worth it in a commercial sense. I do think it's mad that people wouldn't have him back. He would not only be the best player in the team, but it would be by a fairly big distance. I don't think so, we are much better than that team that got us out the Championship. I do think Watkins would be much more prolific in his goal scoring with him back though, used to love having those crosses on a plate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KentVillan Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 This idea that we’d only want the “old Grealish” in our squad is cope. The new Grealish is still one of the best players in the world. Would he be a good value signing? Exactly what we need? Maybe not. Is he a tit? Yes. But take money and drama out of the equation, clearly he would dramatically improve our squad and Emery would love to have a player of Grealish’s calibre at his disposal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wainy316 Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 New/Old Grealish is irrelevant anyway. He'd be the Grealish Unai told him to be and that would be the best version of him. Would never happen anyway even if Citeh were looking to shift. He's on £300k a week. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted January 8 Share Posted January 8 12 minutes ago, Wainy316 said: New/Old Grealish is irrelevant anyway. He'd be the Grealish Unai told him to be and that would be the best version of him. Would never happen anyway even if Citeh were looking to shift. He's on £300k a week. Don't forget that we offered him more than that to stay here though and he's not at city for the money... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 On 07/01/2024 at 16:26, kurtsimonw said: Pep could've spent much less on a player with the same productivity from that position in his system. But Pepe never signed Grealish to play for City. He signed him so he wasn't playing for someone else. Yep that's why he sat on the bench all season when Man City won the treble. What? Played Grealish for 90 minutes in the Champions league final you say? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 1 hour ago, rodders0223 said: Yep that's why he sat on the bench all season when Man City won the treble. What? Played Grealish for 90 minutes in the Champions league final you say? It was so that no-one else could play him in the Champions League final. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kurtsimonw Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 2 hours ago, rodders0223 said: Yep that's why he sat on the bench all season when Man City won the treble. What? Played Grealish for 90 minutes in the Champions league final you say? I clarified they could've signed someone cheaper, he's not even a Pep player. But Pep can fit anyone in to his system, more or less, and it also stopped anyone else signing him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobzy Posted January 9 Share Posted January 9 16 minutes ago, kurtsimonw said: I clarified they could've signed someone cheaper, he's not even a Pep player. But Pep can fit anyone in to his system, more or less, and it also stopped anyone else signing him. I have no idea what a Pep player is, but we were fairly regularly calling him the second best player in the league behind De Bruyne. I don’t think Man City just bought him to spite all the other teams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts